From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Hutchings Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] gro: Name the GRO result enumeration type Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:14:21 +0000 Message-ID: <1256840061.2827.80.camel@achroite> References: <1256836629.2827.69.camel@achroite> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Herbert Xu , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from exchange.solarflare.com ([216.237.3.220]:44736 "EHLO exchange.solarflare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754369AbZJ2SOU (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:14:20 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1256836629.2827.69.camel@achroite> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 17:17 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: > This clarifies which return and parameter types are GRO result codes > and not RX result codes. > > Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings Sorry, this adds some warnings about unhandled enumeration values in a couple of switch statements. I built this with C=2 and mistook the gcc warnings for sparse warnings, which I chose to ignore since the unhandled values are clearly harmless. I suppose I should add an explicit 'default:' to the switches at the same time. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.